TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 1652
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tuated at Raniganj in the State of West Bengal. Appellant issued work orders in favour of Gargi Travels Pvt. Ltd. (for short "Gargi Travels") i.e., the 3rd respondent herein for providing transportation services to the appellant. Certain disputes and differences cropped up between the appellant and the 3rd respondent for which the appellant issued a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "the A & C Act, 1996) thereby nominating an arbitrator. Thereafter, the appellant filed an application under Section 11 of the 1996 Act before this Hon'ble Court praying for appointment of an arbitrator. The said application under Section 11 of the 1996 Act was allowed thereby appointing an arbitral tribunal to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties. 4. In the meantime, the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Council (for short "MSME Council") issued a notice dated 28.01.2023 for Conciliation under Section 18(1) of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (for short "2006 Act") with respect to reference filed by the 3rd respondent. By a letter dated 11.04.2023, the District Magistrate, Sahadara District, inf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is bad in law as the date of hearing was prior to the date of communication by email. He contended that the decision to terminate the Conciliation proceeding and the consequential reference to the Arbitrator by the MSME Council are bad in law. 9. Mr. Datta submitted that an application under Section 11 of the A & C Act, 1996 was filed before the High Court at Calcutta and the same was allowed by this Hon'ble Court and an Arbitrator was appointed. The 3rd respondent herein challenged the appointment of the Arbitrator by filing a Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which was dismissed with liberty to the said respondent to raise all permissible objections before the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 16 of the A & C Act, 1996. 10. Mr. Datta further contended that the appellant sent various letters from the territorial jurisdiction of this Court and the impugned decisions were also communicated to the appellant within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. 11. Mr. Datta concluded by submitting that since a part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, the impugned order holding that this Court lacks territorial juri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Clause (2) of Article 226, this Hon'ble Court can exercise powers conferred by Clause (1) of Article 226 if cause of action arises wholly or in part within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court, even if the seat of the authority is outside the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court. 16. This Court has to now consider whether cause of action, in the case on hand, arose wholly or in part within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. 17. It is well settled that the expression "cause of action" means a bundle of facts which the petitioner must prove, if traversed, to entitle him to a judgment in his favour by the Court. An objection as to lack of territorial jurisdiction has to be decided by the Court after taking into consideration the facts pleaded in support of the cause of action without vouching for the truth or otherwise of such facts. 18. In M/s Swaika Properties (supra) it was held that service of notice does not form an integral part of the cause of action in a writ petition praying for quashing of the notification issued under the provision of the relevant statute whereby the notified land stood vested in the State Government free from a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner carries on business at Calcutta or that the reply to the correspondence made by it was received at Calcutta is not an integral part of the cause of action. Therefore, it was held that the Calcutta High Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition. 23. From the aforesaid discussion it is evident that only the facts constituting an integral part of the cause of action are material for the purpose of deciding as to whether this Hon'ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition of the appellant. In other words, the power conferred under Article 226(1) can be exercised by a High Court only if integral part of the cause of action arose wholly or in part within the territorial jurisdiction of that High Court. 24. Upon a bare reading of the writ petition as a whole, this Court finds that the cause of action of the instant writ petition is that the 1st respondent herein assumed jurisdiction illegally in initiating a conciliation proceeding and terminating the same and consequently referring the matter under Section 18(3) of the 2006 Act to DIAC for initiating arbitration. The appellant had prayed for setting aside the order passed by the 1st respondent ther....